By Ghui

Screenshot of Mediacorp's video
Screenshot of Mediacorp’s video

“Why is that law on the books? Because it’s always been there and I think we just leave it,” adding that he had explained his decision in 2007 to retain Section 377A was PM Lee’s response when asked by a participant of the Singapore Perspective conference organised by the Institute of Policy Studies if “this old and archaic law” which discriminates against a whole group of people could be reconciled with a secular country such as Singapore.

This one answer perhaps best encapsulates the reason why people are increasingly turning to the opposition parties. People want well thought out answers and accountability from their leaders – not a dismissive and seemingly flippant reply.

It defies logic to suggest that just because something has always been there, it should remain as is. By that reasoning, Singapore should still remain a British Colony or that women should still be barred from voting or that slavery should remain in place! The list goes on but you catch my drift.

Laws are never static and have to be reassessed to suit changing viewpoints and needs. Just because he explained his decision in 2007 does not mean that his answer then suits the situation now – it being 5 years ago!

More worryingly, is this the attitude that the government is also taking towards other controversial issues such as the retention of the ISA or the death penalty?

Politicians are elected into government to lead our country. Leadership requires the desire and the ability to steer the country into the future. If something should be changed to reflect the direction a country should move towards, then opting for status quo displays a lack of willpower to genuinely engage with the people. It could also bring into question that leader’s foresight.

Perhaps PM Lee was quoted out of context and it is unfair to judge an entire party based on the statements of an individual. But when that individual is so inextricably linked to the PAP and is also the Prime Minister of Singapore, one cannot help but generalise and feel mildly disturbed.

I am personally for the repeal of Section 377A. As it is, it doesn’t serve any particular purpose. It has already been publicly stated that this Section will not be actively used to prosecute anyone. So, if that were the case, what is the point of it remaining on the statute books? Besides serving no purpose, it can have the added bane of causing confusion to many Singaporeans. Is it a crime or is it not?

Adolescence is a trying enough time for parents and teenagers alike. When you throw grappling with sexuality into the mix, you muddy the emotional trials that much more. Parents, teachers and caregivers will have to explain to children and teenagers that being gay might be a crime even though they might not get prosecuted for it? Not only is this a wishy washy answer, it also heightens the isolation that a gay teenager might feel.

This is a campaign that is gaining momentum and neither PM Lee nor the PAP can avoid taking a stand forever. In my private capacity, I want to see this law abolished for good but I recognise and respect that the majority of Singapore may not agree with me. But, I would still be heartened if the PM could take a genuine stand on the issue. Other leaders in the developed world have taken a stand so why not PM Lee? By evading a stand, this becomes even more needlessly controversial when it really is very simple – is it being applied? If the answer is no, then it is superfluous. End of.

You May Also Like

PSP on Budget 2020: Long term measures are always better than short-term goodies

The Progress Singapore Party (PSP) has issued a press release today (19…

US President Donald Trump: We’re sending medical supplies to Italy, France and Spain

COVID-19 in the United States have surpassed 143,000 cases in total, along…

留澳物理治疗师刚回国 拒戴口罩妇面四控状

曾于周日(5月3日)在顺福熟食中心,因拒绝戴口罩而和民众起争执的40岁妇女,今天(5月5日)在法庭面对四项控状,分别是违反冠状病毒19(临时措施)法令的三项控状,以及一项公共滋扰罪。 被告峇任婕(Paramjeet Kaur)上周日(5月3日)到顺福熟食中心用餐,被一名豆干小贩的女儿提醒戴口罩后,反应激烈骂对方多管闲事而起争执。 警方受询时证实接获民众投报,指有人在顺福熟食中心没戴口罩而和他人起争执。警方于昨晚9时,依据违反阻断措施法令和造成公共自然的罪名,将被告逮捕归案,还押至今。 据被告母亲表示,女儿是本地出生长大,一直到20岁从理工学院毕业后,到澳大利亚深造,并担任物理治疗师。去年才返回我国。 然而,一旦违反了阻断措施法令,罚款将不超过1万元,或监禁不超过六个月,或两者兼施;若公共滋扰罪成,则有可能面对不超过2000元的罚款。 被告今午是通过视像系统“出庭”面控,穿着黑色上衣并戴着蓝色口罩,但是在审讯过程中,她多次把口罩拉下。 她在庭上并未表明是否认罪,但是控方要求将被告还押到心理卫生学院两周,已进行心理评估。法官同意控方要求,将案件展延道5月19日过堂。 峇任婕曾于4月14日早上9时25分,在顺福熟食中心内享用糯米饭时,因没戴口罩被警员提醒,岂止她反而拿起手机反拍。 她的举动被旁人拍下后,上传到社交媒体上,引起网民谴责。

Two dead and four injured in car accident at Lucky Plaza

Two pedestrians died from their injuries and four other were left injured…